Skip to main content

About your Search

20121229
20121229
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
is whether boehner uses the hastert bill which was to never put a bill forward that the majority in the party is not going to vote for. if he will put the hastert rule aside and give republicans a path to vote no that allows the president and the democrats to add their votes where the minority of republicans to pass this thing and i think bill cunningham is right about how this may well play out. i don't think the president want -- the president does not want to go over the cliff. the last thing he needs right now is to -- is to risk going into a second recession. the first one he can blame on push and democrats and i'm there with him. the second one will be his and on his watch. >> sean: there has been a bill in the united states senate that extends the bush tax cuts for everybody and he could at least -- they can temporarily pass that. it has been law since 2001 and 2003. what is the big deal if they need more time. but he is no lincoln. i saw the movie, too, billy cunningham and if the economy goes south it is not the republican's blame this will be viewed as the obama era, not the boehner
-called hastert rule there. >> that's not the hastert rule. it was the majority. >> that's true. >> that's not the hastert rule, at all. >> know where you were going to with the majority and the majority. the numbers are wrong. he had closer to 90% of his caucus aligned there, with 20, 25 members that were unclear, but he had the overwhelming, over 90% -- >> he didn't have 218. >> agreed. that's because none of the democrats were going to join. >> that's an unreasonable standard. >> he's not negotiating with nancy pelosi. he's negotiating with the president of the united states trying to work this deal out and certainly it's become a discussion with nancy pelosi and it's not, it's a discussion with the president of the united states in term of trying to work this through and where does he have to turn? he has to turn back to the principles in this negotiation and that's what he's done. >> but i believe he could have passed his plan b if he hadn't gone with the $20 million cutoff and he'd moved toward the center and that had been under discussion with a $400,000 cut off or a $500,000 cut
. the problem has been this hastert rule, this policy of the republicans in the house, that they won't take a bill to the house floor, even if it will pass, even if it's important to the american people, if it doesn't have a majority of republican support. now, if he was willing to break the hastert rule and take the senate bill to the floor of the house, just like the democratic senate bill that would protect everybody under $250,000 a year, from any tax increase, it would pass. >> right. >> it would pass. >> all right. >> so his problem is a self-imposed one. it's this republican policy that they won't take a bill to the floor, unless a majority of their caucus approves, and the tea party effect in their caucus is so bad that they can't get that done. you saw that with the farm bill, you saw that with the highway bill, you saw that with plan "b." it's a repeated dysfunction. >> let's see if we can get past this hastertnation, so to speak. senator whitehouse, thank you so much. >> thank you. >> now let's turn to congresswoman schakowsky. welcome. >> thank you, professor. >> is there any wa
-called hastert roll but whatever he can to get enough votes, period drawing from nancy pelosi's caucus and his own to get this true. >> how severe do you think the backlash would be against republicans, especially say looking forward to 2014, midterm elections? >> well, polls seem to show that most people will blame republicans for this if we go over the cliff. they already have this reputation of being obstructists and the spending cuts about by the way, i don't think they're going to do anything about that now. so i think these spending cuts are going to go into effect at least in the january. so that means i think if there's such a thing as going partially over the cliff, i think we'll probably do that. so $1.2 trillion spread out over ten years, that begin in january. unless they can find a way to avert that. of course, about half of that comes down on the military side. so you've got a lot of people in that sector and others who are very nervous about the spending cuts. i don't think they're going to do anything about that at the moment. >> paul brandus, the bureau chief of the west wing
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)